trial day 32: the defense continues it's case in chief #91

[TartLemon]

How many times did Travis travel to visit Jodi? She did all the traveling for the trysts. He begged, pleaded and ordered Jodi to stay away.

Seems to me all this other testimony is fluff. Necessary, I guess, but FLUFF none the less.

 

[pufnstuf]

Of course they are paying close attention. They are an attentive, note taking jury. They are always attentive because they take their jobs seriously and make sure they get all their facts. Again, this has no bearing on whether they believe him or not. They are simply listening to him. I would be attentive too and I think she is guilty as sin.

They were attentive to Jodi, too, and a lot of the writing was not just keeping notes of her testimony, but formulating almost "gotcha" questions to be asked at the end of her testimony.

I think this is an intelligent jury. I can't wait to hear the questions they ask this "expert witness."

 

[Love Never Fails]

Web sleuthers, many thanks for the websites with live feed. I finally found one that worked and court is in recess! Doesn't sound like I missed anything except for seeing Gus Searcy's twin giving a scripted testimony. One of you mentioned that I should reboot my computer during the recess so I did. Thanks again and I love reading all your posts. I can never keep up. But they are soooo good!

 

[Forensic fan]

I wondered what Nurmi did on all those breaks

 

[MandyLeigh]

Someone on HLN last week mentioned there is always a group of people who are happy to be paid to say whatever the Defense wants them to say. Especially when they can do it on TV and get their name out there.

I guess I'm saying they should have scraped from the bottom of the barrel a little better or not put this up at all. They have another "expert" who is going on after this guy. Maybe they should have just stuck with her?

Not that I ever want to help Jodi, I am just puzzled that they would go this bad. Then again they were all excited to get Gus on the stand for the two trials (misconduct and Jodi's) so this team boggles my mind.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

Did anyone else see Jodi say "wow!" when the good "doctor" was describing intrusive thoughts? She said 'wow' and then her face started contorting in pain--she's so able to feel her own pain--she forgets to fake normal human reactions. It reminded me of Casey Anthony saying "wow" when reading the psych reports at the defense table. These 2 women nauseate me.

 

[RadarLuv]

Sing and stand on your head too.

They'll stay far, FAR away from you.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lesson learned from this circus. SHRED your trash! You never know what coo coo is rummaging through it.

 

[JayB12]

My understanding is that the judge does not stand for the jury, and I've never seen her stand. :twocents:

The judges way of one-upping the jury. They stand for no one!

 

[TigerBalm]

It was more interesting watching LiLo's plea deal then watching Samuels talk hippocampus again.

I wish we had hot mics on the defense table like they did on TMZ streaming her plea deal agreement. Her attorney went to get something else on the record and Lindsay mumbles "I'm gonna kill you" :lol: He stands up again to get another thing on the record she says mumbles "stop" .. he says to her "well it has to be on the record".
LOL she looks a mess and sounds 148 yr old corpse.

Can't believe the jurors got less then 40 mins of actual testimony this morning, I would be so mad if I was a juror.
Judge Stephens needs to take the jurors lives into consideration, geesh!

 

[getReal]

He was fined in 2000. Not sure when the conflict of interest occurred.

The Doctor's issues with conflict of interest ... my interest in his testimony is conflicted ... today!

 

[AngelWings444]

His CV has him listed as essentially working for the court. So he is suppose to be objective. He did admit to evaluating the mother after the custody issue was dropped so his part in treating the father was unethical. Mr. Samuels is a sex therapist. If I were these people I would being filing a complaint today. He had no right to discuss this matter in such detail without their permission. Doesn't HIPPA also cover psychological problems?????

BBM: I do not believe that for one second and if custody WAS dropped, he had NO business evaluating the mother after the fact. If he did evaluate the mother after the custody was dropped, that itself is unethical.

He did violate HIPPA rights today. He is not an ethical "doctor". If I was the mother and father, I would be filing complaints today! I'm sure the parents names are out there because of the original complaint, and I'm sure it's easy to look at court documents with regards to the custody case. It's sickening to me!! There are children involved, it's not right.

If he had to testify to his ethical violation, he should have done so as a professional. He looked very unprofessional today. He took NO personal accountability for his unethical violations. Everyone else's fault but his own. Unbelievable.

 

[Veritas_Vita]

Did anyone else see Jodi say "wow!" when the good "doctor" was describing intrusive thoughts? She said 'wow' and then her face started contorting in pain--she's so able to feel her own pain--she forgets to fake normal human reactions. It reminded me of Casey Anthony saying "wow" when reading the psych reports at the defense table. These 2 women nauseate me.

I clearly saw it too when JA mouth the words "Wow"

 

[gitana1]

I read that he has been called on this many times in other courtrooms where he has testified. He probably made up this story and has told it many times now.

IMO

What do you mean? What has he done in other courtrooms! Can we get some links? I'd love to read up on that.

 

[Liebchenmutti]

Hugh Hefner? Nuh-uh!
Larry Flynt? Oh yeah!

Hey--don't insult Larry Flynt like that! Maybe Bob Guccione.

 

[Nosey Parker]

I bet he does.

IMO

I've flipped my opinion, now that I see he omitted to mention that he was also ordered to take continuing education on ethics boundaries. Leaving that part out is something Juan would probably like to jump on.

 

[websurfer]

Was she naked too? Like Lizzie Borden?
Then showered with the dead travis body? I mean she seems capable of that..

 

[luvtenniss]

I wondered what Nurmi did on all those breaks

LOL!! My son even laughed out loud!:floorlaugh:

 

[twocuriouscats]

No names have been given out so it's okay. We don;t know who he is talking about.



Well, while it is true that it doesn't mean his evaluation was flawed, I disagree that it wasn't a big deal. he was formally disciplined as a result of this. And it appears he stopped doing evaluations afterward.

I personally would never hire a psych who has been disciplined for an ethical violation, to evaluate one of my clients custody cases and I don;t really know of an attorney who would. I think there is more to the story than the rules changed right when he was deciding to treat this guy and he was unaware of the change. I don't think he would be fined if it was that close and if that's all there was to it.

I also didn't appreciate his little dig about how the woman's attorney was also her boyfriend. That was a sneaky effort to get in an unsubstantiated allegation meant to undermine the credibility of people who complained about his own ethics. And his propensity to make a dig on the stand that is ultimately irrelevant to whether he breached the code of ethics, tells me a lot about his character. It's dirty pool.

RBBM

His character is like that of a dirty boy. With snake-like tendencies.

 

[thefragile7393]

BBM: I do not believe that for one second and if custody WAS dropped, he had NO business evaluating the mother after the fact. If he did evaluate the mother after the custody was dropped, that itself is unethical.

He did violate HIPPA rights today. He is not an ethical "doctor". If I was the mother and father, I would be filing complaints today! I'm sure the parents names are out there because of the original complaint, and I'm sure it's easy to look at court documents with regards to the custody case. It's sickening to me!! There are children involved, it's not right.

If he had to testify to his ethical violation, he should have done so as a professional. He looked very unprofessional today. He took NO personal accountability for his unethical violations. Everyone else's fault but his own. Unbelievable.

He didn't violate HIPAA. There was no identifying information given out. He gave a case scenario but no names, ages, places. No one knows who he is referring to.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Stolat]

Minor4th- I know this should be in the lawyer thread, but you are here now. Why can they not trim down the lunch break, especially when starting late and ending early? 1.5 hours? Is this contractual?

Oh, I see Gitana1 is here, too. Any idea?

I know nothing legal wise but I'd wager the timing of the lunch had more to do with the discussion going on in chambers.